Scholars (Not) Investigating Srebrenica. Academic Feuds and Other Shortcomings

Duijzings Ger ()
Additional contact information
Duijzings Ger: University of Regensburg, History Department, Landshuter Str. 4, 93047Regensburg, Germany

Comparative Southeast European Studies, 2017, vol. 65, issue 3, 589-595

Abstract: Fifteen years after the publication of the Srebrenica report by the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation (NIOD), the Srebrenica genocide has not become subject of more scholarly and historical research. On the contrary, academics prefer to keep their hands off the topic, confining themselves to ‘theoretical’, ‘reflexive’, or ‘moralistic’ reflections on the work done by the NIOD team. Symptomatic of the current state of inertia and diminishing professional standards is the recent book by the Dutch historian and psychologist Eelco Runia in which he attacks the NIOD report from a psychoanalytic standpoint.

Date: 2017
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/soeu-2017-0036 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bpj:soeuro:v:65:y:2017:i:3:p:589-595:n:7

DOI: 10.1515/soeu-2017-0036

Access Statistics for this article

Comparative Southeast European Studies is currently edited by Sabine Rutar

More articles in Comparative Southeast European Studies from De Gruyter
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().